New York Times Forums
The New York Times

Home
Job Market
Real Estate
Automobiles
News
International
National
Washington
Business
Technology
Science
Health
Sports
New York Region
Education
Weather
Obituaries
NYT Front Page
Corrections
Opinion
Editorials/Op-Ed
Readers' Opinions


Features
Arts
Books
Movies
Travel
Dining & Wine
Home & Garden
Fashion & Style
Crossword/Games
Cartoons
Magazine
Week in Review
Multimedia
College
Learning Network
Services
Archive
Classifieds
Book a Trip
Personals
Theater Tickets
Premium Products
NYT Store
NYT Mobile
E-Cards & More
About NYTDigital
Jobs at NYTDigital
Online Media Kit
Our Advertisers
Member_Center
Your Profile
E-Mail Preferences
News Tracker
Premium Account
Site Help
Privacy Policy
Newspaper
Home Delivery
Customer Service
Electronic Edition
Media Kit
Community Affairs
Text Version
TipsGo to Advanced Search
Search Options divide
go to Member Center Log Out
  

 [F] New York Times on the Web Forums  / Science  /

    Missile Defense

Technology has always found its greatest consumer in a nation's war and defense efforts. Since the last attempts at a "Star Wars" defense system, has technology changed considerably enough to make the latest Missile Defense initiatives more successful? Can such an application of science be successful? Is a militarized space inevitable, necessary or impossible?

Read Debates, a new Web-only feature culled from Readers' Opinions, published every Thursday.


Earliest Messages Previous Messages Recent Messages Outline (15918 previous messages)

bluestar23 - 05:04pm Oct 29, 2003 EST (# 15919 of 15931)

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/12/19/161058.shtml

The link...

cantabb - 05:46pm Oct 29, 2003 EST (# 15920 of 15931)

bluestar23 - 04:59pm Oct 29, 2003 EST (# 15917 of 15919)

The problem is that my all links or comments on MD are getting swallowed up by the Niagara...unless you do a WRCooper and just "ignore" it all...

Sorry if you feel that way, but at least I've looked up some of your links and even asked you a question or two.

"Ignoring" is a personal preference; you can try it.

Fine, if it works for WRCooper, but I don't think he can expect others to follow it, and his repeated appeals as if it were a universal Rx appear self-serving, gratuitous.

I personally don't prefer it. I think confronting the "Niagra" might (might !) make a dent, but "ignoring" it will not (esp. when NYT moderators seem so uninterested in it and keep 'ignoring' complaints by posters including you).

Anyway, I think this "Niagra" may slow down little after the original does.

:)

bluestar23 - 06:24pm Oct 29, 2003 EST (# 15921 of 15931)

"Sorry if you feel that way, but at least I've looked up some of your links and even asked you a question or two."

Oh no, you're no problem....you're a valuable poster....necessary even....Re: "niagra (sp) may slow down little after the original does.." what do you mean there...hope for the future...?

bluestar23 - 06:29pm Oct 29, 2003 EST (# 15922 of 15931)

A good place to search for even more Showalter threads might be that famous Talk-Cesspit "The Democratic Underground"..it's perfect for a nut like Showalter....he'd be normal there...

cantabb - 06:53pm Oct 29, 2003 EST (# 15923 of 15931)

bluestar23 - 06:24pm Oct 29, 2003 EST (# 15921 of 15922)

Oh no, you're no problem....you're a valuable poster....necessary even....

Thanks. WRCooper doesn't think so; he groups me with the other two. His personal reasons.

Re: "niagra (sp) may slow down little after the original does.." what do you mean there...hope for the future...?

No, I don't expect this 'Niagara' [edited sp !] to slow down anytime soon. IF ever the real "Niagara" does slow down, then little after that, may be this one might too :)

bluestar23 - 07:23pm Oct 29, 2003 EST (# 15924 of 15931)

Some unfortunate news from the Bush Administration:

Across the government, previously public information is being taken off-line, Secrecy News shows. Here are three of the most recent examples:

- The influential Defense Science Board has removed its list of members. A spokesman cited post-9/11 security regulations as the reason. "He didn't explain how deleting the names of corporate CEOs and others who advise the government on defense policy was likely to increase security against terrorism," Secrecy News notes. (You can find the Board members' names here.)

- The online Center for Army Lessons Learned has been taken down, after the Washington Post reported on an "unusually blunt" report from the website on the inadequacies of U.S. military intelligence in Iraq.

- The White House is preventing Google and other search engines from locating key documents on its website. Files referring to Iraq seem to be particularly verboten.

bluestar23 - 07:24pm Oct 29, 2003 EST (# 15925 of 15931)

http://defensetech.org/

The link...

I do not blindly support the policies of the Bush Administration.....

More Messages Recent Messages (6 following messages)

 Read Subscriptions  Subscribe  Search  Post Message
 Your Preferences

 [F] New York Times on the Web Forums  / Science  / Missile Defense